What to do with Sri Lanka?

[NasserFan207]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Not yet.

Truly though, if you want to be number one for any decent period of time in test cricket you need good-to-great fast bowlers.

If you don't have them. you're pulling your pud. SL can get as many Vaas' and decent spinners as they like. If you aint got quicks in post-WW2 test cricket, you're a pretender to the throne.

Reckon SL would kill for a Vaas and a decent spinner right now TBH.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by NasserFan207

Reckon SL would kill for a Vaas and a decent spinner right now TBH.

Sure, as we'd kill for a decent set of middle order players, but the point is this:

Australia 46-53: Lindwall, Miller, Johnston

England 50s: Bedser, Trueman, Statham, Tyson

Aus early 60s: Davidson, McKenzie (with Benaud)

WI 60s: Hall, then Griffith too.

SA late 60s-60s: Pollock, Procter

England early 70s: Snow then Willis and a couple of solid blokes plus Underwood

Australia 70s: Lillee and Thomson, Walker, Gilmour

WI: well, a dozen of them

Aus 90s-00s: McGrath, McDermott, Hughes, Gillespie. Plus Warne obvs

India: the only time they had a really decent pacer since Dev: Zaheer, plus a bit of Sharma plus Lol-Sreesanth.

England: Glanderson, Tremlett, Broad, that Yorkshire buffoon who looks like he's just out of the pub (can't think of him), Finn.

[Athlai]

Herath is a decent spinner TBF.

[NasserFan207]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Sure, as we'd kill for a decent set of middle order players, but the point is this:

Australia 46-53: Lindwall, Miller, Johnston

England 50s: Bedser, Trueman, Statham, Tyson

Aus early 60s: Davidson, McKenzie (with Benaud)

WI 60s: Hall, then Griffith too.

SA late 60s-60s: Pollock, Procter

England early 70s: Snow then Willis and a couple of solid blokes plus Underwood

Australia 70s: Lillee and Thomson, Walker, Gilmour

WI: well, a dozen of them

Aus 90s-00s: McGrath, McDermott, Hughes, Gillespie. Plus Warne obvs

India: the only time they had a really decent pacer since Dav: Zaheer, plus a bit of Sharma plus Lol-Sreesanth.

England: Glanderson, Tremlett, Broad, that Yorkshire buffoon who looks like he's just out of the pub (can't think of him), Finn.

I reckon a team with 3-4 world class spinners could do the same though, we've just never witnessed that side

awta for the most part tho

Herath is a decent spinner TBF

Would call him average to decent

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Athlai

Herath is a decent spinner TBF.

Yeah, yeah he is. But you can have four decent/ very good spinners, a la India here in 77 when they had Chandra, Prasanna, Bedi and Venkat against a second string Australian side save for Thommo. But you will not dominate an era unless you have decent-very good quicks.

People on here can blow as many loads as they like over spinners, it's a fact.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by NasserFan207

I reckon a team with 3-4 world class spinners could do the same though, we've just never witnessed that side

awta for the most part tho



Would call him average to decent

See above, India had it in the 70s. Away from dust bowls they had Nowt. How would that team go in Hobart or SA? Or on the pitches in England, against a team with 3 decent pacers and a serviceable spinner? They'd get smashed.

[Prince EWS]

This thread isn't really about whether or not they have the potential to become a dominant #1 side though.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

This thread isn't really about whether or not they have the potential to become a dominant #1 side though.

Yes true. It's never happened in the history of CW before that the discussion in a thread might move on.

They'd kill for Vaas now, no doubt. And Murali of course. He'd make them, if nothing else, incredibly hard to beat at home.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Yes true. It's never happened in the history of CW before that the discussion in a thread might move on.

There doesn't seem to have been any sort of natural progression though; you just started talking about it for no particular reason.

[morgieb]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Not yet.

Truly though, if you want to be number one for any decent period of time in test cricket you need good-to-great fast bowlers.

If you don't have them. you're pulling your pud. SL can get as many Vaas' and decent spinners as they like. If you aint got quicks in post-WW2 test cricket, you're a pretender to the throne.

India proved that you don't need great pacers to have success at test cricket.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

There doesn't seem to have been any sort of natural progression though; you just started talking about it for no particular reason.

See, Tories always talk within the paradigm.

The point is, if SL or anyone else, wants to be number one, they decent a stock of good or better quicks.

For countries like SL, that means breaking their pre-existing paradigms. Otherwise, you're happy with somewhere between 3-5 in the rankings long term.

And that stinks, if you're happy with that.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by morgieb

India proved that you don't need great pacers to have success at test cricket.

What? They've been number one for 6 months or so in 70 years!!!! And that was largely on the back of Zaheer making them competitive away. Now there's a consistent home and away structure in palce in terms of the test program, you can't dominate an era without quicks.

Being number one for a year is an achievement, but you can't tell me Zaheer + mediocre quick + good spinners = recipe for long term domination. Can't be.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Yeah, yeah he is. But you can have four decent/ very good spinners, a la India here in 77 when they had Chandra, Prasanna, Bedi and Venkat against a second string Australian side save for Thommo. But you will not dominate an era unless you have decent-very good quicks.

People on here can blow as many loads as they like over spinners, it's a fact.

Yeah I definitely agree was just for arguments sake disagreeing with NasserFan about the current state of Sri Lanka's bowling stocks.

[NasserFan207]

Originally Posted by Burgey

See above, India had it in the 70s. Away from dust bowls they had Nowt. How would that team go in Hobart or SA? Or on the pitches in England, against a team with 3 decent pacers and a serviceable spinner? They'd get smashed.

Don't know if I'd say India had 3-4 world class spinners at once, and during the 70s they had other problems anyway.

Just saying I don't see why its impossible.

[smalishah84]

haha.......at least get SL get back to really competitive rather than making them a dominant force overnight